When changes in a state's substantive criminal law apply retrospectively to cases involving homicides committed in 1981 and 1982, but not to cases involving homicides committed in 1983, does this violate the Due Process Clause and the Eighth Amendment?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED--CAPITAL CASE Questions 1. When changes in a state’s substantive criminal set out the elements of capital murder which the prosecution must prove to the satisfaction of a unanimous jury before death is a possible sentence, does it violates the Due Process Clause to have that substantive criminal law apply retrospectively to cases in which the homicides were committed in 1981 and 1982, while not applying the new substantive law to a case in which the homicides were committed in 1983. Under the Due Process Clause can a conviction of capital murder be required in cases involving 1981 and 1982 homicides before death is a permissible sentence, while death sentences for convictions of the lesser offense of first degree murder for homicides committed in 1983 remain intact? 2. When changes in a state’s substantive criminal set out the elements of capital murder which the prosecution must prove to the satisfaction of a unanimous jury before death is a possible sentence, does it violates the Eighth Amendment to have that substantive criminal law apply retrospectively to cases in which the homicides were committed in 1981 and 1982, while not applying the new substantive law to a case in which homicides were committed in 1983. Under the Eighth Amendment can a conviction of capital murder be required in cases involving 1981 and 1982 homicides before death is a permissible sentence, while death sentences for convictions of the lesser offense of i first degree murder for homicides committed in 1983 remain intact? 3. When State law provides that a death sentence may be vacated and a resentencing ordered when new evidence would probably result in a less severe sentence at a resentencing, does it violate the Eighth Amendment to ignore changes in law that require juror unanimity, instead of a majority vote, as to the elements of capital murder, which were not previously regarded as elements, from consideration of the probable outcome at a resentencing? ai